from: http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Henry2.htm Click Here: <A HREF="http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Henry2.htm">Henry2</A> ----- There's Something About Henry Part II: The Myth of the Serial Killer By David McGowan July 2000 "At some time I have start(ed) to hear funny voices, like a person calling me, but no one call me." Rafael Resendez-Ramirez, in a letter to a reporter in Houston following his surrender to authorities Most Americans are familiar with what is considered the classic serial killer 'profile.' This was a notion first put forth by the venerable FBI, which coined the term 'serial killer' and pioneered the concept of 'profiling,' in an alleged attempt to understand the phenomenon of mass murder. In truth, as we shall see, the concept of the serial killer profile was put forth largely to disinform the public. In the case of Henry Lee Lucas, few if any of the elements of the serial killer profile apply. For instance, serial killers are said to act alone, driven to do so only by their own private demons. So far removed from ordinary human behavior are their actions that they would not, indeed could not, share their private passions with others. In Henry's case, this is a patently false notion. It has been officially acknowledged that Lucas worked with at least one, and at times as many as three accomplices (Toole's pre-teen niece and nephew were frequently brought along to witness - and at times participate in - the crimes of Henry and Ottis). It is also claimed that serial killers target a particular type of victim, similar in age, gender, race, and other demographic factors. Again, in Henry's case, this simply does not fit the known facts. Henry's victims in fact had little, if anything, in common physically with one another. The victim's ages ranged from children to the elderly. Both genders and all races were also well represented. It is further claimed that serial killers follow a readily identifiable MO, with the means of obtaining victims and the trajectory of the crime following a well defined pattern. And again, this is clearly not the case with Lucas. Victims were obtained and death inflicted by a variety of means - including bludgeoning, stabbing, strangulation, shooting, and suffocation. Some were killed in their homes, while others were abducted and taken to remote locations. Some were sexually abused, both before and after death, while others were not. Some were cannibalized. Some were left on display - for maximum impact upon their discovery - while others were left so as not to be discovered at all. In other ways as well, Henry Lee - the consummate serial killer - did not even come close to matching the profile of what he was supposed to be. Strangely though, perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the Henry Lee Lucas story is that it is not actually remarkable at all. In reviewing the case histories of some two dozen other alleged serial killers, it becomes readily apparent that few, if any, fit the supposed profile. The victims of Resendez-Ramirez, for instance, ranged in age from 21 to 88 years, with a mix of males and females. The cause of death varied as well, with most being bludgeoned, though one was shot in the head, another stabbed, and yet another had a pick-ax buried in her head. Though not readily apparent, all of these weapons used for inflicting death - by both Lucas and Ramirez - had one thing in common: they are what are termed 'weapons of opportunity.' In other words, they are weapons that were acquired at the crime scene, immediately before the murders were committed. Notably, this precisely mirrors the means by which the CIA has historically taught its assassins to kill. A CIA training manual entitled A Study of Assassination advises the would-be assassin that "the simplest local tools are often the most efficient means of assassination. A hammer, axe, wrench, screwdriver, fire poker, kitchen knife, lamp stand, or anything hard, heavy and handy will suffice � All such improvised weapons have the important advantage of availability and apparent innocence � the assassin may accidentally be searched before the act and should not carry an incriminating device if any sort of lethal weapon can be improvised at or near the site." The Mafia assassination service known as Murder, Inc. - the brainchild of the Lansky/Luciano syndicate, which had extensive connections to U.S. intelligence agencies - had a similar philosophy. As Jay Robert Nash notes in Bloodletters and Bad Men: "Like most of Murder, Inc.�s assassins, Pittsburgh Phil never carried a weapon in case the local police picked him up on suspicion. He would cast about, once he had selected his murder spot, for any tool handy that would do the job." [As a brief aside, it should be noted that the man identified above as Pittsburgh Phil, whose real name was Harry Strauss, was credited with killing at least 500 people in this manner from the late 1920's through 1940. This feat should put him at or near the top of any self-respecting serial killer list.] Henry Lee recounts in The Hand of Death that his training by the cult followed this time-honored tradition. Of course, the venerable FBI assures us that Satanic cults and Satanic crime do not exist in modern day America. To put this in its proper context, however, it is important to remember that this is the very same FBI that during the reign of Murder, Inc. - and for several decades thereafter - refused to acknowledge the existence of organized crime in America. A number of America's other notable serial killers showed a proclivity for utilizing weapons of opportunity as well. The other serial killing Ramirez - Los Angeles' famed Night Stalker - is a case in point. In the majority of the murders attributed to this Ramirez, the victims (who were of various ages, races and genders) were stabbed, bludgeoned, slashed, strangled, or electrocuted with weapons acquired at the crime scene. Some were even left alive, as was the case with Resendez-Ramirez as well. Florida serial killer Bobby Joe Long also showed a preference for inflicting death by a variety of means (shooting, strangling, stabbing), often with weapons of opportunity, and also left some of his victims alive. As did Ted Bundy, whose most notorious alleged crime - the bludgeoning of four women in the Chi Omega sorority house, was committed with a club acquired on the grounds of the house immediately before his entry. This crime, by the way, was in marked contrast to Bundy's previous alleged murders, which involved but a single victim. Bundy's final murder before his incarceration, the killing of a twelve year old girl, also did not match his supposed MO as put forth by FBI profilers. As previously stated, this is the rule rather than the exception. Arthur Shawcross, dubbed the Genesee River Killer, showed no consistency in the targeting of victims. Males and females, young and old, black and white - all were represented on the victim's list of Shawcross. And this pattern, or non-pattern, is evident in the tales of numerous other serial killers: Charles Ng and Leonard Lake: authorities recovered the remains of seven men, three women, and two babies from their Northern California compound. The cause of death was impossible to determine. Jeffrey Dahmer: his victims, while all young men, included whites, blacks, Asians, Hispanics and American Indians. The Hillside Stranglers (Angelo Buono and Kenneth Bianchi): all victims were women, but the cause of death varied, including electrocution, strangulation, lethal injections, and lethal gas. Richard Speck: his eight alleged victims died by a variety of means, including strangulation, stabbing, slashing of the throat and breaking of the neck, all in a single evening. The Gainesville Ripper (Danny Rolling): his victims included both men and women from various age groups. The Boston Strangler (Albert DeSalvo): victims represented a range of ages, races and attractiveness. Though all were strangled (with materials acquired at the crime scene) some were stabbed, mutilated and/or sexually molested as well. Most were left on display, though one was discretely covered with a blanket. The Vampire of Sacramento (Richard Chase): his victim's ages ranged from 20 months to 51 years, both males and females. Causes of death included shootings, stabbings and bludgeonings, with some victims left mutilated, beheaded and/or disemboweled. Some were cannibalized as well. The Coed Killer (Edmund Kemper): all victims were female, though of various ages and races. Death was inflicted by means of stabbing, strangulation, suffocation, shooting and bludgeoning. Herbert Mullin: victims, both male and female, varied in age from children to the middle-aged. Weapons of choice included guns, knives and blunt instruments. The Manson Family: victims, again both males and females, ranged in age from teen-aged Steven Parent to middle-aged Leno LaBianca. Death came by way of shootings, stabbings and bludgeonings, or a combination of these. Clearly then there are any number of serial killer cases in which there is no defining Modus Operandi, and in which the deceased don't fit any kind of 'victim profile.' But what of the notion of the serial killer as a lone predator? Was Henry and Ottis' partnership an aberration? Not at all. There are any number of serial killer cases where it is officially acknowledged that there was more than one perpetrator. The Manson Family, of course, is probably the most well known case of multiple perpetrator 'serial killing.' Less well known is the case of the 'Ripper Crew' in Chicago in the early 1980's. Described by authorities as a four-man Satanic cult, the Rippers - led by charismatic Robin Gecht - killed as many as 17 women in as many months. There could well have been more than four members of this particular murderous cult, however. A few days after the four were arrested, another mutilated body showed up at a location where previous bodies had been left by the Rippers. Then there is the case of Charles Ng. Though Ng was the only one to stand trial for his series of killings, it is acknowledged that the crimes were committed with the assistance of Leonard Lake, who committed suicide upon his arrest. And evidence strongly suggests that there were others involved as well. Lake's ex-wife was almost certainly involved. Police were well aware that at the very least, she had tampered with - and removed evidence from - the crime scene, including twelve videotapes believed to be snuff films of the murders. And a diary seized by police with a detailed plan to construct a series of bunkers outfitted with supplies, weapons, and sex slaves strongly hinted that there was more than just two individuals involved. Many other serial killers have worked in pairs as well, such as the Hillside Strangler team of Kenneth Bianchi and Angelo Buono. Working the same Los Angeles area turf just one year after the Stranglers were stopped was the team of Roy Norris and Lawrence 'Pliers' Bittaker. And a few years after they were caught, the team of Douglas Clark and Carol Bundy would be working the very same L.A. streets in a series of killings dubbed the 'Sunset Strip Murders.' The year after they were caught, another serial killer took over the L.A. market - Richard Ramirez, the notorious 'Night Stalker.' According to numerous witnesses - who placed Ramirez back in his home state of Texas at the time of some of the killings - these murders were not the work of a single killer either. Other evidence as well - such as the fact that more than one gun was used in the killings - tends to point to multiple perpetrators. Then there is the matter of the 'Son of Sam' killings in New York. Though most of the literature available paints Berkowitz as the proverbial lone serial killer, Maury Terry and others have presented a compelling case that the killings were in fact the work of multiple cult members. In other serial killer cases as well, evidence pointing to multiple assailants is ignored or explained away with unlikely scenarios. The body of one of Bobby Joe Long's victims, for instance, yielded semen showing both A and B blood types, indicating at least two perpetrators. A later victim also yielded semen evidence which did not match that obtained from the previous victim. And none of the samples proved to match that of Long. There has long been speculation that the work of the 'Boston Strangler,' officially deemed to be Albert DeSalvo, was not the work of one man. Most of the officials involved in the investigation, in fact, never believed that a single killer was responsible. Even in those cases that seem to come closest to matching the classic serial killer profile, such as John Wayne Gacy and Jeffrey Dahmer, there is a compelling case to be made that there were others involved. That evidence will be examined in Part III of this series. Here we will examine the cases of two high-profile alleged serial killers/mass murderers who were said to be acting alone. The first is a very recent case, that of Yosemite killer Cary Stayner. The other dates all the way back to 1966, the year Richard Speck allegedly went berserk in a home filled with young nursing students in Chicago. In February of 1999, a forty-three year old woman and two teenage girls (one her daughter) were brutally murdered while visiting Yosemite National Park in California. Police originally suspected a group of men and women with extensive criminal records who were known members of a drug trafficking ring. At least eleven members of this group were at one time suspected of complicity in the women's deaths. The group was based in Modesto, where one of the victim's billfolds incongruously showed up some time after the murders. One member of the group worked at the hotel/restaurant from where the women disappeared. Another had in her possession the victim's bank account number and ATM password. Yet another made incriminating statements to police and was discovered to have blanket fluff in his vehicle that matched the fibers recovered from one of the victims. Investigators were building a substantial case against the group - who were being held in custody on unrelated charges - when a fourth victim was discovered in Yosemite. Two days later it was declared that a handyman at the hotel taken into custody, Cary Stayner, was solely responsible for all four murders. Unexplained, then or now, was the evidence that earlier had pointed in the direction of others. Many of those involved in the case harbor serious doubts that Stayner acting alone could have committed these crimes. Apart from the physical evidence and testimony implicating others, the story concocted to explain how these murders were the work of a single individual is questionable at best. A good number of police and FBI agents assigned to the case believed from the beginning that more than one perpetrator was responsible, based on the physical implausibility of a single assailant. Many doubt that one man acting alone could have gotten the jump, so to speak, on three able-bodied women and bound them all. They also doubt that one man could have carried the three bodies out to his car undetected, with one still alive and most likely resisting the killer's efforts, aware that her friend and mother had both already been killed. According to the official story though, this is exactly what happened. Stayner then allegedly single-handedly cleaned up the hotel room in which the first two murders occurred before driving for miles to kill the third victim and dump the body. The killer then supposedly drove many more miles to another location to abandon the car, with the other two bodies still in the trunk. Stayner is next said to have taken a cab back to Yosemite Valley, though he would most likely have been covered in blood at the time. Two days later, he is said to have returned to the car in yet another vehicle and at that time to have set it afire, still with the two bodies inside. After this, he allegedly drove to Modesto to dump the billfold, though why he didn't destroy it in the car fire along with the rest of the evidence is anyone's guess. Even with this rather convoluted story, authorities have not been able to explain away all of the incongruous evidence. For example, a taunting letter sent by the killer revealing the location of one of the bodies was sealed with saliva that was not that of Stayner. The FBI reluctantly acknowledged that DNA tests had verified that fact. Spokesmen for the Bureau had an explanation, however. Their theory was that Stayner had "tricked an unsuspecting male" into supplying the saliva to seal the envelope. How exactly this would be done was left to the imagination. As was why it would be done. If Stayner had the foresight to not want to leave incriminating evidence on the letter and envelope, why not just use ordinary old tap water? It's been known to do the job. If the available evidence in the Stayner case leaves doubts about the sole guilt of the accused, this is all the more true in the case of the infamous Richard Speck. The official story of what happened to those eight student nurses in the early morning hours of July 14, 1966 is, in a word, preposterous. [Just two-and-a-half months before the mass murder of the nursing students, Anton LaVey had declared it to be the first year of the age of Satan. A couple weeks after this slaughter, Charles Whitman - a former marine who had received training by the Naval Enlisted Science Education Program (NESEP), an intelligence entity - would climb the tower at the University of Texas carrying three rifles, three handguns and a shotgun, and proceed to open fire, killing sixteen. Whitman would leave a note which read, in part, "I don't quite understand what is compelling me to type this note. I have been to a psychiatrist. I have been having fears and violent impulses ... After my death, I wish an autopsy on me be performed to see if there's any mental disorder."] If veteran criminal investigators are puzzled as to how Stayner was able to subdue three women, then it boggles the imagination how one man was able to single-handedly subdue nine women, bind them all, and then systematically kill all but one of them. According to the sole survivor, Cora Amurao, it was she who answered the door that night, allowing Speck entry into the home. She claimed he was brandishing a gun, though none of the victims were shot that night and no evidence was ever found indicating that a gun was used at the crime scene. Speck quickly corralled Amurao and the five other women in the house into a room, where he proceeded to tear up a sheet into strips and tie the women up, one by one. How he was able to accomplish this while keeping all the rest at bay is anyone's guess. Three more women would arrive home that evening and would likewise be subdued and bound by Speck. Meanwhile, Speck began dragging the women off one at a time and slaughtering them, taking twenty minutes or more with each victim. As he finished with each, according to Amurao, he would wash up and then return for another. This scene played itself out over the course of about three hours. During this time, the women awaiting their turn tried to hide under the beds, hoping to elude their assailant. They were, of course, found and killed. All, that is, except Cora Amurao who claims she avoided detection by Speck. The suggestion was made that Speck had lost count of his victims and had falsely concluded that all the girls were dead, thereby making the crucial error of leaving a living witness. This part of the story is problematic in a number of ways. The first question raised is why did the girls remain in the room in which they were bound? If, despite their bindings, they were able to move about within the room - which they clearly were - then why not leave the room altogether? And once out of the room, why not get completely out of the house? After all, the pattern was set early on. After the first couple of slayings, it had to be abundantly clear to the women that their lives were about to come to an abrupt end. It also had to be quite clear that there would be twenty minutes to kill (no pun intended) before the killer returned, more than enough time to attempt an escape. And what was there to lose? It is inconceivable that these women would have remained to await their turn with Speck. And what of the survivor? It should be readily apparent to anyone that an adult human simply cannot successfully hide underneath a bed. This is amply illustrated by the fact that all but one of those attempting to do so were discovered. And yet one survived. How is it possible that Speck could have searched under the beds to locate the others, and yet failed to see Cora Amurao lying there as well. And is it really possible that Speck was unable to count to nine, especially considering that the stakes were exceedingly high? Clearly if not for the existence of the survivor, the police would have immediately assumed multiple perpetrators. No theorizing was necessary, however, as the witness was on the scene to provide the unlikely scenario that would be refined to become the official story. Since the entire trial of the man fingered by Amurao, Richard Speck, hinged on her eyewitness testimony - and little else - this star witness was zealously protected. She was kept incommunicado and prepped extensively for months for the testimony that she was to deliver. But not before she had identified the suspect in a most unusual manner. While Speck was recovering in the hospital from a failed suicide attempt, Amurao was allegedly sent in dressed as a nurse to observe the suspect. From this encounter, she positively identified him as the killer. Leaving aside the obvious fact that this was a blatantly illegitimate means of identifying a suspect - which would have invalidated any subsequent attempts by Ms. Amurao to pick Speck out of a police line-up - the real question here is: in what alternative reality would this ever actually happen? What caliber of police official would send a severely traumatized crime victim - who just days before had witnessed the slaughter of eight of her friends and experienced the sheer terror of knowing that she could well be next - into a room unprotected to face the man who had put her through such torture? And what victim would be able to do so, with the memories so fresh? And what guarantee was there that Speck would not recognize his accuser, given that hers was the first face he had seen as he entered the house? At any rate, this was just a warm-up exercise for what was to come. When the time came for Amurao to deliver her critical testimony, she delivered a bravura performance. She recited a meticulously rehearsed version of the events of July 14, and when the time came to identify the suspect in court, she played her trump card. Rising from her seat, allegedly without prompting or rehearsal, she calmly stepped out of the witness box, walked casually over to where Speck sat, stood directly in front of him while looking him in the eye, and informed the court that this was the man. That was the clincher; Speck was found guilty and sentenced to death. There are indications though that this was not a foregone conclusion. Prosecutors clearly had doubts about their ridiculously shaky case. One indication of this is the remarkable fact that, though the case was moved some three hours outside of Chicago, the judge stayed on in the new venue, an unprecedented development. This same judge slapped a gag order on the press, guaranteeing that no news would get back to Chicago - or anywhere else in the country for that matter. Coupled with the blocking of any interviews with Amurao, this action shut the public out from ever learning the weakness of the case against Speck. But no matter. Authorities and the press had already assured everyone that Speck was guilty. And the public was hungry for a culprit to hang this heinous crime on. Speck would do just fine. But many of the more thoughtful citizens of Chicago are still waiting to learn what really happened in that house on that fateful night. The most likely explanation? The 'survivor' and star witness was not actually a survivor at all. She was quite possibly an accomplice to a cult of individuals who perpetrated this slaughter. She was, as they say, the inside man. And it was not likely an accident that she was left alive. It was absolutely essential that she remain alive to sell the single assailant scenario and thereby derail an investigation before it ever began. After all, authorities had noted from the beginning that the house was not highly visible and had immediately assumed familiarity of the killer with the surroundings. Speck did not have this familiarity, though Amurao certainly did. And it is likely not a coincidence that Amurao admitted to being the one to let the killer (or killers) into the house, while ironically becoming the sole survivor. And what of Speck? He was likely little more than a patsy or fall guy. He may have had some involvement with the killings, though he certainly was not the sole assailant. Like David Berkowitz, he may have taken the fall to protect the rest of the clan. This would certainly explain the preposterously lax treatment of Speck during his confinement. Or maybe you didn't catch that little home videotape - produced circa 1988 - that depicted Speck snorting huge piles of cocaine and flashing rolls of money (not to mention sporting a rather large pair of breasts). How it is possible that one of America's most notorious killers, while residing in what is reputedly one of the toughest prisons in the country, was able to obtain copious quantities of drugs and money, and gain access to video equipment and hormone treatments has never been explained. It could be that Speck was rewarded in prison for being such a stand-up guy and taking the fall. Or it could be, as the right-wing law-and-order crowd would have you believe, that this is yet another indication of how America coddles its criminals. If you choose this explanation, however, you might consider explaining this fact to the hundreds of thousands of non-violent offenders rotting away in jails and prisons all across this country, many serving longer sentences than some of America's serial killers have served. "I must have done it, if everybody says I did." Richard Speck PART III HOME ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, All My Relations. Omnia Bona Bonis, Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
